Abstract: Latin American religious political thought includes colonial Spanish and Portuguese ideologies that preceded independence but have survived into the post-independence era, authoritarian ideologies supportive of military governments in the twentieth century, and progressive liberation theologies. In this article, I present a distinct tradition: a version of classical liberal thought. This tradition is skeptical of big government, opposed to caste systems, supportive of a high degree of federalism, uneasy with militarism, and supportive of democratic institutions while affirming religious social norms. This ideology was developed in northeastern Brazil in the early nineteenth century by a Carmelite activist named Frei Caneca (Brother Mug), who published a newspaper titled the Typhis Pernambucano (Tiphys of the State of Pernambuco).

Abstract: This book is a collection and reworking of research done by Pascal Salin since around 1990. Salin is an economist in the tradition of the Austrian school of economics. He emphasizes the centrality of individual choice in an uncertain world in which individual actions interact to produce spontaneous orders. But he is no mere conduit of established ideas. He also offers his own highly original insights honed after a lifetime as an economist, one who has earned the respect in which he is now held by his peers worldwide. The book makes delightful reading. Salin covers a lot of ground in this book, mostly within the topics indicated by the title, though in the final two chapters he goes beyond these and into the foundations of economic science. The book is divided into five parts: (1) firms, markets and competition, (2) globalization and international economic problems, (3) monetary integration, (4) money, finance and economic policies, and (5) foundations of economic theory.

Abstract: Stephen Cox writes of the complexities that guided this well-known columnist, literary critic, best-selling novelist, avid reader, and intellectual, Mary Isabel Bowler Patterson, better known as Isabel Paterson or “I.M.P.” This edited collection includes a well-chosen selection of her essays, reviews, and letters. Combining both formal and colloquial prose, Paterson’s writings incorporated quips about such people as Sinclair Lewis and Henry David Thoreau, as well as candid discussions of William F. Buckley, Jr., Buffalo Bill, and Cecil Rhodes. The more than one hundred names mentioned in the collection included such diverse figures as Virginia Woolf, John Pierpont Morgan, H.G. Wells, Henry Hazlitt, and Jasper Elliot Crane.

Abstract: A critical but underdeveloped part of the libertarian debate about immigration is the question of who, if anyone, owns public property, and the consequences of the answer to this question. Libertarians who favor restrictive immigration policies, such as Hans-Hermann Hoppe, argue that taxpayers own public property, and that the state, while it is in control of such property, should manage it on behalf of taxpayers in the same way private owners would manage their own property. In other words, it should be quite selective about who may enter. Walter Block, who takes an “open borders” position, does not appear to dispute the claim that taxpayers own public property, but nevertheless argues that immigrants are entitled to ignore the state’s control of, and thus may freely enter, such property. In this article I explore the question of public property ownership using Rothbardian property rights principles. I conclude that, at least with respect to a particular type of public property, neither Hoppe’s nor Block’s reasoning is consistent with these principles. I also consider the idea that the state ought to have a role in managing public property in light of some libertarian anarchist ideas about the state. I conclude that supporting a legitimate role for the state as an immigration gatekeeper is inconsistent with Rothbardian and Hoppean libertarian anarchism, as well as with the associated strategy of advocating always and in every instance reductions in the state’s role in society.

Abstract: The present paper offers a libertarian reading of one of the most important Chinese novels of the twentieth century, The Travels of Laocan, written by Chinese entrepreneur Liu E between 1903 and 1906. I start with an exposition of the ideas associated with the concept of “Asian values,” the evident cultural unviability of this notion, and how “Asian authoritarianism” has been rationalized and justified on the basis of a Hobbesian conception of human nature. Next, I examine Liu E’s life and career as an entrepreneur in a highly interventionist society. Finally, I focus on his magnum opus, The Travels of Laocan, a fictionalized autobiography that explains Liu E’s philosophical and libertarian ideas.

Abstract: Libertarian philosophy asserts that only the initiation of physical force against persons or property, or the threat thereof, is inherently illegitimate. A corollary to this assertion is that all forms of speech, including fraudulent advertising, are not invasive and therefore should be considered legitimate. On the other hand, fraudulent advertising can be viewed as implicit theft under the theory of contract: if a seller accepts money knowing that his product does not have some of its advertised characteristics, he acquires the property title to the customer’s money without voluntary consent, which is theft. The balance between these two logical extensions of property rights—the right of free speech and the right of contract—lies somewhere in the area of communication philosophy, and can be explained through understanding the role of communication in human interactions. Advertising is a form of communication that may convey important information about the conditions of the proposed contract. These conditions are expressed in particular words that may have different meanings in different circumstances. Therefore to determine whether a particular example or “misinterpretation” is mere sophistry or a type of fraud, the judicial system has to approach each issue on a case-by-case basis. The border between legal and illegal should be determined by precedents and by expectations based on commonly accepted definitions of terms—what people commonly understand by the words and other forms of communication they use.

Abstract: This article offers a libertarian re-examination of Brazilian political history focusing mainly on the first few decades of the 19th century. The article finds two main tendencies lurking behind the various political parties and labels of the time: one, associated mainly with the Conservative Party, leaned dangerously away from the individual liberties advocated by classical liberalism and instead more toward authoritarian forms of government. The other, associated mainly with the Liberal Party, was more libertarian in nature. This article also concludes that other examinations of these budding political parties fall short by overlooking a potentially authoritarian state underlying the Conservative project that dominated politics in Brazil at the time.

Abstract: Although many libertariansshare similar moral foundations, they disagree about whether the state can be justified. The most famous libertarian attempt to justify the state is that of Robert Nozick. This attempt has been criticized by, among others, the libertarian anarchist Murray Rothbard. In this article, Nozick’s theory and Rothbard’s critique are discussed, as well as some other attempts to justify the state from libertarian premises. Keeping the criticisms of those theories in mind, an alternative theory, which attempts to bypass the criticisms, is put forward. This alternative theory explains how a state—most probably a nonminimal democratic state—can legitimately be formed in a condition of anarchy without violating anyone’s libertarian rights. One result of this is that the rights-based case for minarchism is severely weakened.

Keywords: Robert Nozick, Murray Rothbard, John Locke, natural rights, state justification, democracy, state of nature, minarchism

Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to address from a normative perspective issues raised by John Mueller (2010) in Redeeming Economics: Rediscovering the Missing Element. Mueller criticizes economists, including Austrians, for failing to properly address unilateral transfers—in particular, charity, childcare, and crime—in economic thought. Mueller challenges economist Gary Becker’s position that giving increases the utility of the giver. Mueller also claims that the ends of action are persons, not utility or satisfaction. Further, unlike Ludwig von Mises and other economists, Mueller maintains that there is not a single preference scale but that there are separate scales for ends and means. In addition, his view is that people give in proportion to love for others and steal in proportion to hatred of others. One of my aims is to integrate my work on unilateral transfers based on Objectivist ethics with some ideas from the Austrian school. I discuss the overlap between some Objectivist principles and those of Austrians such as Mises, Friedrich Hayek, and Henry Hazlitt. In so doing, I extend work I have done on crime, childcare, and charity to the Austrian school. I compare this work with Mueller’s, focusing on some heuristics I have derived for childcare and for charitable giving.

Abstract: The scope of libertarian law is normally limited to the application of the non-aggression principle (NAP), nothing more and nothing less. However, judging when the NAP has been violated requires not only a conception of praxeological notions such as aggression, but also interpretive understanding of what synthetic events count as the relevant praxeological types. Interpretive understanding—or verstehen—can be extremely heterogeneous between agents. The particular verständnis taken by a judge has considerable moral and political implications. Since selecting a verständnis is pre-requisite to applying the NAP, the NAP itself cannot tell us which one we ought morally to choose. Therefore the application of the NAP calls on moral and political considerations outside of the NAP itself. Since some of these are more consistent with an endorsement of the NAP than others, libertarianism is not a “thin” commitment to the NAP alone, but a “thick” commitment to the NAP and other supporting moral and political considerations.

Abstract: In this review, I will focus on how William Irwin’s The Free Market Existentialist manages to take a broad definition of existentialism and narrow it into dogma. Such narrowing limits the appeal of this book and causes an interesting discussion to fall short of its promised goal: a demonstration that libertarianism is compatible, and perhaps a natural fit, with existentialism.

Abstract: This paper reviews some points of agreement between Objectivism and the Austrian school of economics. It also discusses some of my points of departure with Objectivism. One such is Rand’s justification for holding life as man’s ultimate value. I present a case that the recognition of death’s inevitability is needed to establish life as man’s ultimate value. Although death’s inevitability is implicit within Objectivist ethics (in its emphasis on a person’s entire life), the focus of Rand’s discussion of the ultimate value is on life’s contingency, not its limitedness. I present an example comparing a being with a contingent and limited life to a being with a contingent but potentially endless life. This illustrates the function of life’s limitedness in valuation. I qualify my position somewhat by exploring one way in which a being with a contingent but potentially endless life may value his life as a whole. I also explain that a being with an endless life might have no ultimate value, but could have an endless number of goals. Finally, I discuss a desert-island scenario that supports the noninterference principle.

Abstract: In Marco Polo’s Travels, the market is depicted as a voluntary means of production and exchange, leading to the creation of material abundance and wellbeing, whereas the Mongol state, by contrast, is repeatedly engaged in the extraction of wealth at the point of a sword. This paper examines Polo’s descriptions of the economic and political features of the Mongol empire through the lens of Austrian economics, with particular attention to taxes and tariffs, government spending, predation, state monopolies, currency manipulation, prohibitions and regulations, and control and surveillance.

Abstract: I offer historical reasons for the relative paucity of discussion of property in land during much of the last century. Insofar as this reflects lack of understanding of the subject, it puts at risk, for lack of adequate theoretical defense, the historic separation of land and state. The destructive attacks by Henry George and Karl Marx in the nineteenth century can be attributed to an uncritical acceptance of Locke’s labor theory of ownership; reliance on an outmoded concept of land as physical, fixed in quantity, and not man-made; and failure to perceive the social function of property in land. These points are discussed in turn. To bring some clarity to this clouded area, Spencer Heath and F. A. Harper sought a more empirical, scientific approach. Heath’s operationalizing of the terms “property” and “capital” solves the Lockean problem and reveals, as a measure of civilization, an evolutionary trend towards property of all kinds being administered as productive capital. With respect to land, the trend manifests most significantly in the recent emergence of multi-tenant properties. These, being specialized communities, privately owned and administered, may be harbingers of an impending new step in social evolution—the provision of all public services by private contract rather than taxation.

Abstract: In this article, Spencer Heath offers a general defense and explanation of the capitalist system and a forecast of its further evolution. After showing various ways in which its major functional elements contribute to voluntary exchange, the vital process and central creative act in the economy, Heath observes that the capitalist system is young, evolving, and incomplete. In particular, it has yet to carry the process of voluntary exchange by contract and consent into the field of public services. Heath anticipates this happening through the further development of private property in land. Noting that ground rents are paid out of the productivity of land users, and are the market payment for public services which make productive use of the land possible, Heath foresees a perfect welding of the private and particular interest of the land-owning class with the public and general interest. As landowners come to better understand their interest, he predicts they will begin to monitor public affairs and then fund, supply, and ultimately administer all public services, relieving land users of all taxation and burdensome bureaucratic regulations. Their recompense for thus liberating land usage and providing new services will be the enhanced ground rents and values from the growing demand for land.

Abstract: David Sobel has recently argued that libertarian theories that accept full and strict self-ownership as foundational confront what he calls the conflation problem: if transgressing self-ownership is strictly and stringently forbidden, it is implied that the normative protection against one infringement (say, being stabbed) is precisely as strong as against any other infringement (say, touching someone’s hand without that person’s consent). But this seems to be an absurd consequence. In defense of libertarianism, I argue that the conflation problem can be handled in a way that allows us to honor basic libertarian commitments. It is suggested libertarianism should be characterized as presumptive libertarianism, treating self-ownership as an assumption the content of which remains to be worked out when applied, rather than as a dogma ready for application: a proposal that relies on a standard market model. Since such a proposal is likely to appear to many philosophers—libertarians in particular—as inherently flawed, a considerable part of this article defends it against possible criticisms. It is argued that presumptive libertarianism is not only a coherent and theoretically elegant notion, but a version of libertarianism that honors pre-theoretical commitments to self-ownership and liberty better than some mainstream versions of libertarianism.

Abstract: Although Michel Chevalier was an influential economist during the second half of the nineteenth century, and is well-known as an architect of the Cobden-Chevalier Treaty, his work in economics has been largely forgotten. In particular, Chevalier is notable for being one of the only French liberals opposed to patents. Unfortunately, his original and compelling critique of the patent system has been neglected. This paper rediscovers Chevalier’s arguments against patents, shows why they are still relevant today, and explains why they have been mostly ignored by historians of economic thought.

Abstract: Ostensibly accepting Lockean property theory and some basic assumptions of Nozick’s entitlement theory, Barbara Fried (1995) argues that property owners have a right to the physical things they own, but not to their “surplus value,” which is produced not by the owner’s labour but by “scarcity conditions of one sort or another.” I argue that Fried’s interpretations of Nozick and Locke lead her to a conclusion that is not supported by those Lockean and Nozickian entitlement principles which she does accept. I also argue that Nozick’s weaker interpretation of the Lockean Proviso is closer to Locke’s originally intended meaning, and is more plausible in itself. Finally, I attempt to resolve another issue which could be raised as an objection to Nozick’s entitlement theory—that “ownership” is indeterminate—by proposing an alternative approach which rejects the endeavour to devise an account of the essential concept of ownership.

Abstract: A growing literature has explored the workability and efficacy of governance without the state. The difficulties typically raised in the context of these studies concern under which conditions cooperation or Hobbesian chaos would arise in the absence of a monopolist of coercion. This paper challenges the idea of the stateless society from another vantage point, arguing the institutions articulated by proponents of the stateless society would struggle at reconciling heterogeneous views regarding the rights of third parties. This is relevant for many of the most contentious policy debates, such as abortion and animal rights.

Abstract: This study identifies a new channel through which government provision of public goods crowds out voluntary provision. Controlled laboratory experiments are used to identify how the possibility of government provision alters the likelihood of successful voluntary provision. Previous experiments on voluntary provision are studied in an environment where the alternative to voluntary provision is no provision at all. In this study, failed voluntary provision is met with backup government provision financed by mandatory taxes. Comparisons with baseline sessions in which subjects contribute toward a public good using a provision point mechanism with full refund allow for the identification and measurement of moral hazard. Results confirm the existence of moral hazard crowd-out of voluntary contributions due to this incentive structure. This type of crowding out adds to rather than replaces other crowding out channels that have been studied in the economic literature.